Report: Justice Department will clear Ferguson police officer who shot Mike Brown



Not surprised but just disgusting!


What the fuck, Eric Holder?


No waaaaaay.



This may be a mistake on their part. #BlackLivesMatter is still active and in the field.


I think after the federal investigation and all the other stuff, this particular officer acted ‘properly’.
IMHO: I think it’s likely the guy charged him. Probably sad but true.

Now, as far as other police officer ‘killings’… especially the 12 year old, and the guy in a Wall-Mart store… absolutely need to involve feds there.


I think it’s vastly more likely Brown had his hands up while he was shot to death:

Also, it turns out that the reason most believe that Brown charged Wilson is due to the account of a repeated liar and racist:

Yes, Grand Jury… and our next witness that’s against Brown and in support for a white officer is the KKK. Nothing to see here, just listen to these “unbiased” people and take it to heart, Grand Jury. Yep, and justice will be served… somehow…


Video that strongly suggests police have been lying:


The very strange way the case was handled:


Corporate media caught in lies:


Video: Police lied. Mike Brown was killed 148 feet away from Darren Wilson’s SUV:


There was a deliberate attempt to stuff the grand jury full of as much information as it could handle. And that the grand jury wouldn’t charge Wilson with a crime was a totally predictable consequence. Here’s why.:


According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. attorneys prosecuted 162,000 federal cases in 2010, the most recent year for which we have data. Grand juries declined to return an indictment in 11 of them.



Same evidence, same testimony…it’s not shocking, that the Justice Department came to the same conclusion as the grand jury.

1 Like

Why couldn’t the Justice Department take into account some of the facts that @Cowicide mentioned, though? They aren’t bound by the same regulations governing court procedure, are they?

Same evidence, same testimony…it’s not shocking
I'm not shocked, just disgusted. Also, some of the factors surrounding the testimony has "evolved" since the Grand Jury was exposed to it. Please see my links within my previous post that expound on this fact.

This is all executive branch. This was squarely under the authority of Eric Holder, who answers to Barack Obama.

I think this says more about the state of the US, and the real functioning of the executive branch, than a damned speech.


I offer you this history lesson.

On 10 May 2007, 42 years after the homicide, Alabama State Police Corporal James B. Fowler was charged with first degree and second degree murder for the death of Jimmie Lee Jackson on the night of February 18, 1965.

On November 15, 2010, Fowler pleaded guilty to one count of second-degree manslaughter. Mr. Fowler apologized for the shooting but insisted that he had acted in self-defense, believing that Mr. Jackson was trying to grab his gun. Fowler was sentenced to six months in prison.

[emphasis and re-phrasing mine]

I trust the relevance of this history in the context of the week in which you decide to join our discussions is not lost on you.


Declining to press civil rights charges is different than clearing someone of civil rights charges. And civil rights charges are not simply a federal do-over for any and every charge that could be made under state law. There are different standards and elements to civil rights charges than there are for run-of-the-mill state homicide charges, and the government would have needed to prove a lot more than they would for a manslaughter charge, for example:

To bring federal civil rights charges, the Justice Department would have needed to prove that Officer Wilson had intended to violate Mr. Brown’s rights when he had opened fire and that he had done so willfully — meaning he knew that it was wrong to fire, but did so anyway.

Who says they didn’t? The NY Times piece linked to says they did independent analysis of the facts, and most of the facts described by cowicide were known and/or presented to the grand jury.


What does MLK week have do do with this particular incident?

This is not Alabama in the middle of the 60’s.
We have a black president and black attorney general, and this particular incident received massive attention at the federal level, along with media coverage, demonstrations (and whatever).

Sometimes you have to go along with analysis despite your other feelings.
Sometimes, it’s tough to say “I screwed up”.

In this case, I heard early media reports and jumped on the bandwagon.
I thought a cop killed a black guy just outside of the patrol car with his hands up.

Since then, I’ve seen the other reports and data, looked at it, and… yes, "I screwed up’.
Remember it is regarding this particular incident, there are lots of incidents that still need attention of the prosecutors… but that’s not happening.


Considering the only things having any credibility in this case are the autopsy reports, I 100% agree with you, not surprising.


What lesson is this suppose to teach us? Racism existed in 1960’s Alabama?

You couldn’t possibly be implying that a person should be convicted based on an unrelated case involving similar demographics?

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

  • you can interpret this anyway you like, but the main message transcends race.
1 Like

I can only show a horse to water. I can’t make the horse drink.


Whatever your point, you’re making it very poorly. Michael Brown was leading a peaceful protest? That any killing of a black person by a white cop is comparable? That a homicide indictment by state officials 42 years after a killing means that the federal government should bring civil rights charges? And that because we just had MLK day this is especially relevant?


Why is it that it’s only sock puppet newb accounts who side with racist cops on this issue? Take your baseless opinions elsewhere.

Darren Wilson deserves death.


Welcome to BoingBoing. It really is bad form to join and immediately post on a controversial topic. You will be viewed, most likely, as an outsider, and even more likely, as an astroturfer. Good luck; we hope you will stic around.